|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
Subject: Scripting Hooks (was: Re: reject_unknown_sender_domain flawed?)
From: Jim Seymour (jseymour
LinxNet.com)Date: Sun Aug 20 2000 - 11:46:23 CDT
- Next message: Jim Seymour: "Re: [OT] Lotus Domino Performance question"
- Previous message: Deim Agoston: "trusted-users"
- Next in thread: Amos Gouaux: "Re: Scripting Hooks (was: Re: reject_unknown_sender_domain flawed?)"
- Reply: Wietse Venema: "Re: Scripting Hooks (was: Re: reject_unknown_sender_domain flawed?)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
wietse
porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) wrote:
> Message-Id: <20000813135034.E980E45635
spike.porcupine.org>
>
[snip]
>
> All the more reason to rip the UCE crap out of the smtpd and to
> make the hooks available to an external scripted process so that
> crusaders can do their thing without having to patch C code.
Why not just leave the *existing* anti-UCE "crap" in and add support
for the hooks? To my way of thinking: the existing anti-UCE stuff
is mostly sufficient.
Regards,
Jim
-- Jim Seymour | PGP Public Key available at: jseymourLinxNet.com | http://www.cam.ac.uk.pgp.net/pgpnet/wwwkeys.html http://home.msen.com/~jimsun | http://www.trustcenter.de/cgi-bin/SearchCert.cgi
- Next message: Jim Seymour: "Re: [OT] Lotus Domino Performance question"
- Previous message: Deim Agoston: "trusted-users"
- Next in thread: Amos Gouaux: "Re: Scripting Hooks (was: Re: reject_unknown_sender_domain flawed?)"
- Reply: Wietse Venema: "Re: Scripting Hooks (was: Re: reject_unknown_sender_domain flawed?)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]